I wasn't going to bother arguing with you over his last 2 titles if you already believe Kobe was more impressive and had a tougher time in his first 3 titles. There's no point of arguing against your less idiotic view, when you have a separate view thats incredibly more stupid.

You do realize none of your opinions are backed up by facts right? Its not a fact that Kobe faced tougher defenses, beat better teams, and had less help then Lebron? They're opinions that may have some numbers behind it, but those numbers don't measure context, which means they don't turn an opinion into a fact.

Everything is subjective when making any sports comparisons.

There is nothing remotely controversial about considering all star teammates or HOF teammates when talking about a given player's help

There is nothing remotely controversial about looking at team records to figure out about how good a team was...

There is nothing remotely controversial about looking at points allowed per possession to figure out how good a defense was...

There is nothing remotely controversial about considering all star teammates or HOF teammates when talking about a given player's help

There is nothing remotely controversial about looking at team records to figure out about how good a team was...

There is nothing remotely controversial about looking at points allowed per possession to figure out how good a defense was...

Never said it was controversial. But its stupid to just ignore context.

Question: Do you think having Wade was just as beneficial to Lebron as having Shaq was to Kobe since both were all-star teammates for them? Ignore the rest of the teams. I'm just asking about that factor by itself.

Never said it was controversial. But its stupid to just ignore context.

Question: Do you think having Wade was just as beneficial to Lebron as having Shaq was to Kobe since both were all-star teammates for them? Ignore the rest of the teams. I'm just asking about that factor by itself.

When you write that you probably believe something I wasn't aware that I was supposed to ignore it because you did not want to support your statement with facts.

My post had to do with Kobe's 5 titles in general. On average Kobe has faced tougher defenses, beat better teams and had less help than Lebron James.

This is true. But yet again...people don't view Lebron winning the title as what makes him elite. The title was necessary to prove he's a champion. So all of this numbers vs titles...etc. Really doesn't matter now that Lebron won one.

Unless he gets injured or falls of dramatically, Lebron will go down as a better player than Kobe. Why? Because he's a better basketball player.

I can just see these stupid ring arguments morphing into...5 rings vs 4 mvps...

It's sad.. from everything that I've seen, people dislike Kobe because of his fans, not because of him as a player. I think if people took a step back and just evaluated Kobe for who he is as a player, he'd have a lot more fans and a lot less hell-bent haters.

No, his actions and quotes both on and off the court give me reason to dislike him, the fans are just the icing :

I don't dislike his talent, I dont dislike his game. I dislike his fake persona, I dislike his quotes about Shaq, how he wanted out on the Lakers when they werent a stacked team but now he talks about how loyal he is etc etc. I dislike his injury claims and how he uses that to make out like some kind of 'warrior', i dislike his mannerisms and how he eerily resembles Jordan and how he did things. I dislike the comments he said about Gasol last year and year before, and basically calling out the team, avoiding all responsibility for his own shot jacking and ordinary defense. I dislike the league's propensity to give Kobe awards that he does not deserve, i dislike his unwillingness to admit fault in most situations. I mean there is so many things, but it would take a long time to write it all.

This is true. But yet again...people don't view Lebron winning the title as what makes him elite. The title was necessary to prove he's a champion. So all of this numbers vs titles...etc. Really doesn't matter now that Lebron won one.

Unless he gets injured or falls of dramatically, Lebron will go down as a better player than Kobe. Why? Because he's a better basketball player.

I can just see these stupid ring arguments morphing into...5 rings vs 4 mvps...

Its circular reasoning. People discredit Kobe's first 3 titles due to Shaq yet when I point Kobe had less help we are supposed to go back to numbers. When I point out Kobe had great playoff numbers during the first 3 peat. It goes back to help. When I point out Lebron had more help. It goes back to numbers.

Its circular reasoning. People discredit Kobe's first 3 titles due to Shaq yet when I point Kobe had less help we are supposed to go back to numbers. When I point out Kobe had great playoff numbers during the first 3 peat. It goes back to help. When I point out Lebron had more help. It goes back to numbers.

You pointing out that Kobe had less help during the first three-peat is irrelevant because no one believes that nor do they agree with the context-less criteria you base that on. And even if he did somehow had less help, no one in their right mind thinks he had so much more of a difficult time that it explains the difference statistically between the two.

And I don't think anyone has ever said Kobe didn't put up great playoff numbers during that time. It just doesn't compare to Lebron's and some other greats.

LOL, he wants to have it both ways. Sorry, Kobe, winning multiple rings while putting up insane stats belongs to MJ. Pathetic that he's commenting on Shaq when Shaq is the reason he has those first 3 rings. No way is he winning in 00-02 without Shaq. Like he isn't chasing the numbers too - that's why he keeps jacking up those shots and chasing KAJ. It's a joke that he even thinks he could be putting up the all-round numbers that Lebron is - only in the scoring. Kobe-system indeed.

Its circular reasoning. People discredit Kobe's first 3 titles due to Shaq yet when I point Kobe had less help we are supposed to go back to numbers. When I point out Kobe had great playoff numbers during the first 3 peat. It goes back to help. When I point out Lebron had more help. It goes back to numbers.

Well, that is kind of my point.

The difference is simple though. Kobe simply could not have won without Shaq. End of story. Not one other player in the league could have come in and allowed Kobe to win those 3 rings. Even with Duncan, depending on what Shaq had around him, he might not win.

With Lebron, it's a little different, but not entirely.

My point was simple. Kobe fans use the 5 rings as the main source of evidence for his greatness. While Lebron fans use his level of play as the main source of evidence for his greatness. There is a bit of a difference there.

Only until this era of "ring counting"...generally by Kobe fans using this to prop Kobe up....did fans and players (MJ for example) think ring count defined a player this much. Level of play and what you do with your help is what matters. Obviously Kobe didn't have the same chance as Lebron to put up the same numbers early on...partly because of his team and in more so because he just wasn't good enough. At the same time, Lebron obviously had a completely different early career...joining a 17 win team...playing without a championship roster or coach.

Kobe has literally played with like 12 legit championship rosters. Lebron has played with 3 now. That has to be factored in.

And what is wrong with Kobe's numbers? They are some of the best ever. So I don't even get what the hell he is talking about.

You pointing out that Kobe had less help during the first three-peat is irrelevant because no one believes that nor do they agree with the context-less criteria you base that on. And even if he did somehow had less help, no one in their right mind thinks he had so much more of a difficult time that it explains the difference statistically between the two.

And I don't think anyone has ever said Kobe didn't put up great playoff numbers during that time. It just doesn't compare to Lebron's and some other greats.

LOL, he wants to have it both ways. Sorry, Kobe, winning multiple rings while putting up insane stats belongs to MJ. Pathetic that he's commenting on Shaq when Shaq is the reason he has those first 3 rings. No way is he winning in 00-02 without Shaq. Like he isn't chasing the numbers too - that's why he keeps jacking up those shots and chasing KAJ. It's a joke that he even thinks he could be putting up the all-round numbers that Lebron is - only in the scoring. Kobe-system indeed.

This. And people need to look at a few things. If Kobe was drafted onto a bad team where he could've put up ridiculous stats, the longest he would've been in that situation is probably about 8 years at the most, because if a player is that good, which Kobe was, his team is either getting the right pieces around him to lighten his load or that superstar is going somewhere else either thru FA or by demanding a trade.

Now lets say Kobe gets the worst scenario, where he's in that situation for his first 8 years. No matter who's he with, he's not breaking 30 ppg in any of his first 4 years, and probably not 20 ppg or 25 ppg in a few of his first years, and definitely not on some high efficiency. He's not coming out the gate just dominating. As athletic as he was, coming out of HS he just wasn't as NBA ready, athletic enough, and physically imposing enough to dominate right away the way Lebron did, nor was he athletic enough, skilled enough, and mature enough to dominate right away the way Jordan did. So that leaves at the most another 4 years to put up absolutely ridiculous stats, which he may have. But we saw what he did in those 3 years which he was at his peak/prime, so lets just assume he had those same 3 years and another one like it. Are we really saying anything much different?

And then after that lets say he gets his Gasol/Odom/Bynum/Artest like help, where he's still the best player. He's probably putting up the same stats he was putting up anyway. Probably not any better, or any worse. On top of that, I'd like to point out, he only really became a superstar in 2001. Look at his stats from 01-03 where he played with Shaq, and ignore 04 since that season was pretty tumultous with Kobe's rape case, injuries, Malone and Payton joining, etc. Compare his stats from 01-03 with his stats from 08-10. 01-03, his stats were 28/6/5/ on 46% and from 08-10 they were 27/6/5 on 46%. Not much different, in fact slightly better in the Shaq years. So, it really doesn't have to do much with Shaq, but just playing with better players in general. But as we see, playing with better players in general, never really stopped Jordan or Lebron from putting up these jaw dropping statistical seasons, which they've done numerous times even while playing on contending teams. Not to say that Kobe hasn't been impressive statistically on good teams, just not as impressive as them.

while not having arguably the most dominant player ever at his peak divert attention away.

Who did they face and what were their defensive ratings? You clamor for context but present very little.

Kobe put up numbers with Shaq. He put up numbers with Kwame. He put them up with Gasol. He continues to put them up with Dwight. 4 very different offensive forces. The only constant is Kobe putting up numbers. The notion that Kobe's 3 peat numbers are the result of Shaq is unsupported by the evidence. In fact I would hypothesize that the majority of Kobe's greatest offensive performances came when he was the undisputed sole player worthy of "attention" on the floor.